Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : World Affairs Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (1693)	8/28/2002 12:25:07 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3959

There is no dispute. Israel was the aggressor, as agreed upon by the U.S. as well as the UN. Was it a preemptive strike? Perhaps, but the evidence is extremely shaky, and you certainly have not provided any. If Israel was worried about its security, and launched the war as a preemptive strike, then Israel would obviously have been delighted when the Arab countries offered them peace treaties and recognition. Israel was not. On the issue of Jews being barred from the Wailing Wall, that was indeed an injustice. But, given the hostile manner in which the Zionists treated the indigenous Moslems, it is understandable. Remember that Jewish community got along fine with the Moslems before the Zionists came along. And during this period of injustice, these indigenous Jews were supporting the PLO. Tom